Ratjoy.com » Forums » Ratjoy.com General Discussion » 5/6 ANNOUNCEMENT
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments.
5/6 ANNOUNCEMENT
|
A J RJ: amanbearpig CO: aManBearPig Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 54 Karma: 18 Joined: Mar 30, 2012 |
Posted on May 7, 2012 I completely agree Victoria. While it is all well and good to say Walter did not alter price levels, cause inflation, give himself massive bonuses, etc, if - as Scott says - he would be completely fine with anyone doing this, then there is a massive problem. This money does not sit in a vacuum. If the only way to legitimately compete is to cheat (or employ a bug - however you wish to phrase it), then anyone who is trying/caring will do the same. This money will not just sit in their accounts! It in fact cannot sit there in the bank, if the game and market are to remain playable. If no one buys anything, everything becomes static and...whats the point? To see who can pump out the most shares to get the highest NW? The whole point of money is to spend it. |
|
Richard Ripberger RJ: Rip CO: Rip Post Rating: 17 + / - Total Posts: 153 Karma: 78 Joined: Mar 28, 2012 |
Posted on May 7, 2012 and thus why the game is better off without a stock market. I miss chat more than I would stocks.
|
|
Michael Tsui RJ: Reisen CO: Reisen Udongein Inaba Post Rating: 0 + / - Total Posts: 45 Karma: 30 Joined: Apr 26, 2012 |
Posted on May 7, 2012 I don't know. If I have the money, I would also buy out an entire market - especially if it is an essential infrastructure like power and water.There is a reason why monopolies makes the most money. |
|
Andrew Naples RJ: Clemen Salad CO: Clemen Post Rating: 4 + / - Total Posts: 214 Karma: 89 Joined: Apr 26, 2012 |
Posted on May 7, 2012 "I completely agree Victoria. While it is all well and good to say Walter did not alter price levels, cause inflation, give himself massive bonuses, etc, if - as Scott says - he would be completely fine with anyone doing this, then there is a massive problem. "Walter actually gave himself 6.5G if you look at the revenue sheet. |
|
Urist Esterar RJ: Uristqwerty CO: Uristqwerty Post Rating: 6 + / - Total Posts: 5 Karma: 15 Joined: Apr 11, 2012 |
Posted on May 8, 2012 Well, if you bought out an entire market with money you gained through means that would unanimously be considered legitimate, people might not necessarily like what you did, but they wouldn't accuse you of cheating, and hopefully not of breaking/ruining the game.If, however, the funds you used were from a questionably legal, or outright illegal, source, there would be an issue. Especially if the source of the money you used was an exploit in the game that allowed you to temporarily acquire near limitless wealth (even if, shortly afterwards, the game naturally balances against it). Another consideration is that, if you were aiming for a monopoly with long term plans, you wouldn't buy the horridly overpriced goods alongside the more reasonably priced ones, so other people would be far less able to make a massive profit off your actions. Monopoly backed by legitimate income? Probably fine. Monopoly backed by illegally acquired funds, with no long-term intentions? Clearly problematic. |
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments.